Schultz v. Schultz
Idaho Supreme Court
187 P.3d 1234 (2008)
- Written by Haley Gintis, JD
Facts
In February 2005, Kenneth Dean Schultz (plaintiff) and Rhonda Rae Schultz (defendant) married. In May 2005, Rhonda gave birth to the Schultz’s daughter, Sylvia. Kenneth frequently abused Rhonda. On February 2, 2007, Kenneth was arrested after a particularly violent incident and pleaded guilty to domestic battery. Following the incident, Rhonda left the Schultz’s home in Idaho and moved to Oregon with Sylvia. Once in Oregon, Rhonda received a restraining order against Kenneth. In March 2007, Kenneth filed for divorce in an Idaho court. As part of the divorce action, the court granted Kenneth supervised visitation. Kenneth then filed a motion with the court to order Rhonda to move back to Idaho with Sylvia or, alternatively, to order Rhonda to release Sylvia into Kenneth’s custody. Rhonda opposed the motion and submitted to the court two affidavits. In the affidavits, Rhonda described Kenneth’s frequent abuse and stated that he had made no attempts to visit with Sylvia in Oregon. Kenneth presented no evidence to refute Rhonda’s allegations. The trial court then granted Kenneth’s motion on the ground that Rhonda had unilaterally moved with Sylvia to Oregon, which made it difficult for Kenneth to have visitation access. Rhonda filed a permissive appeal with the trial court. The trial court denied the permissive appeal. Rhonda then filed a motion for permissive appeal with the Idaho Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Burdick, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 790,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.